καὶ ὄψα δή
. For
δή see 367 C note
ἑταῖραι
. G. W. Nitzsch (
Rhein. Mus. 1857, pp. 471 f.), Richter (
Fl. Jahrb. 1867, p. 141), Madvig, and Stallbaum take offence at the juxtaposition of
ἑταῖραι and
πέμματα and suggest respectively
ἀθῆραι (apparently an error for
ἀθάραι, cf.
Ar.
Plut. 673
),
ἐραῖα (=
ἑψήματα in Schol. on 445 C),
ἐσχαρῖται ‘panes delicati,’ and
ἕτερα (with the following
καί deleted),—conjectures which are altogether needless and refute one another. The text is successfully defended by Hug (
Hermes 1876, p. 254), who cites an exact parallel in
Ar.
Ach. 1090
—1092
κλῖναι, τράπεζαι, προσκεφάλαια, στρώματα, |
στέφανοι, μύρον, τραγήμαθ’ , αἱ πόρναι πάρα, |
ἄμυλοι πλακοῦντες, σησαμοῦντες, ἴτρια | (varieties of
πέμματα). Cf. also Amphis ap. Ath. XIV 642 A
οἶνος ἡδύς, ᾠά, σησαμαῖ, |
μύρον, στέφανος, αὐλητρίς and infra III 404 D, IX 573 D note From these passages it may fairly be doubted whether Plato's mention of
ἑταῖραι is in any way even
παρὰ προσδοκίαν (as the Oxford editors suggest): for
αὐλητρίδες were almost as common a feature at dessert as the cakes (
πέμματα) etc. which accompany them here: see e.g.
Xen.
Mem. I 5. 4
,
Symp. 2. 1, Pl.
Symp. 176 E
,
Prot. 347 D
. Vahlen (
Index Lect. per sem. hib. 1875—6 Berol.) quotes also Catullus'
si tecum attuleris bonam atque magnam
cenam non sine candida puella
et vino et sale et omnibus cachinnis
(13. 1 ff.).
καὶ τὴν ποικιλίαν
. ποικιλία means variety of colour as e.g. in embroidery: cf. 378 C, III 401 A,
Euthyph. 6 C
. On the omission in A see
Introd. § 5.
χρυσὸν καὶ ἐλέφαντα
: with reference to chryselephantine statuary. Note that (according to Plato) the demand for decorative arts does not arise till the physical necessities of man are satisfied. Cf. Nettleship
Lectures and Remains, II p. 73.
μείζονά τε αὖ τήν
. τέ is
ἀνακόλουθον (Hoefer
de part. Pl. p. 14): for other instances in the
Republic see V 463 D, VII 522 B, IX 575 A. In this passage Richter would change
τε αὖ τήν into
τοιαύτην, comparing 372 E; but the text is sound, and
τοιαύτην would be quite wrong.
αὐτὴν τὴν πόλιν (cf. 370 E), conjectured by Heller instead of
αὖ τὴν πόλιν, is neat but needless.
πλήθους ἅ
: i.e.
πλήθους τούτων ἅ, as Ficinus understood the words. Stallbaum's alternative suggestion (that
ἅ refers directly to
ὄγκου and
πλήθους) gives a poor sense. Cf. infra 373 E note
θηρευταὶ πάντες
. The addition of
πάντες shews that
θηρευταί is used in a wide sense, including every variety of fishing as well as hunting:
Laws 823 B
θήρα γὰρ πάμπολύ τι πρᾶγμά ἐστί, περιειλημμένον ὀνόματι νῦν σχεδὸν ἑνί. πολλὴ μὲν γὰρ ἡ τῶν ἐνύδρων, πολλὴ δὲ ἡ τῶν πτηνῶν, πάμπολυ δὲ καὶ τὸ περὶ τὰ πεζὰ θηρεύματα. In
Euthyd. 290 B
—D,
Soph. 219 E
ff., and
Laws (l.c.), Plato makes
θηρευτική include ‘fishing for men’ e.g. in war, or by Sophists etc. This wider meaning clearly rests upon a Platonic—or rather Socratic (see
Xen.
Mem. II 6. 29
, quoted by J. and C.)—metaphor, and is not intended here. Cf. Benseler in
Fl. Jahrb. 1881, pp. 236 ff. Aristotle on the other hand regards hunting as characteristic of the most primitive society (
Pol. A 8. 1256^{a} 35 ff.), and so too Plato himself in
Laws 679 A.
ῥαψῳδοί ‐‐ ἐργολάβοι
are the poet's servants. In Athens and elsewhere they formed regular guilds or
σύνοδοι τῶν περὶ τὸν Διόνυσον τεχνιτῶν: cf. Arist.
Probl. XXX 10. 956^{b} 11
οἱ Διονυσιακοὶ τεχνῖται. The
ἐργολάβος contracted with the poet for the performance of his play, acting as a kind of financial agent or middleman between him and the
σύνοδος to which he belonged. See Müller
Bühnenalterthümer, pp. 392—414.
παιδαγωγῶν ‐‐ κουρέων
. We infer that in the ‘healthy’ State fathers were
παιδαγωγοί, mothers suckled (
τιτθῶν) and nursed (
τροφῶν) their own children, and the professional hair-dresser was unknown.
συβωτῶν
. See on 372 B.
χρείαις
. Cobet's
χρείᾳ is not, I think, necessary. The plural (for which cf. 369 D al.) refers to the different occasions when we may require the help of doctors.
λέγομεν
. λέγωμεν may be right, but the first hand of A was apt to err in these subjunctive forms (
Introd. § 5), and the Indicative is somewhat more natural here: cf. (with Schneider) 377 E
ἀλλὰ πῶς δὴ λέγομεν καὶ ποῖα;
πολεμήσομεν
. Stallbaum adds
δή after
πολεμήσομεν with some inferior MSS. The effect of its omission is to lay special stress on the first mention of
πόλεμος in
πολεμήσομεν, which should be pronounced with emphasis. Cf. IV 432 C, IX 583 C.
πολέμου ‐‐ γένεσιν
. War then arises from the acquisition of territory and wealth: cf.
Phaed. 66 C
διὰ γὰρ τὴν τῶν χρημάτων κτῆσιν πάντες οἱ πόλεμοι ἡμῖν γίγνονται, where war is farther traced to the body and its desires, to satisfy which we seek to multiply our possessions. Cf. Arist.
Pol. A 8. 1256^{b} 23
ἡ πολεμικὴ φύσει κτητική πως ἔσται.
ἐξ ὧν ‐‐ γίγνηται
defines
γένεσιν. War comes
ἐξ ὧν i.e.
ἐκ τούτων ὧν κτλ. (
ὧν for
ἐξ ὧν, according to the usual Greek idiom, cf.
Euthyph. 10 C
, and III 402 A
ἐν ἅπασιν οἷς ἔστι al.), from that which involves both cities and individuals in calamities, viz. from the desire of money. Cf. 373 B note and (for the sentiment
Laws 870 A ff.
ἡ τῶν χρημάτων τῆς ἀπλήστου καὶ ἀπείρου κτήσεως ἔρωτας μυρίους ἐντίκτουσα δύναμις διὰ φύσιν τε καὶ ἀπαιδευσίαν τὴν κακὴν κτλ. The love of money —so Plato held—is the root of all evil. This explanation is due to Schleiermacher; others (Schneider, Stallbaum, J. and C. as an alternative) refer
ἐξ ὧν to war and the like=‘ex cuiusmodi rebus’ (Stallbaum). It is an objection to such a view that it makes Plato say that evils come from War (and the like), directly after he has declined to say anything of the sort (
μηδέν γέ πω — ἐργάζεται). Further, if
ὧν referred to war, the sentiment would in itself be a platitude and almost deserve to be expunged from the text, as it is by Herwerden. On the other hand
ἐξ ὧν—γίγνηται is on Schleiermacher's view quite consistent with
μηδέν γέ πω— <*>ργάζεται, for although war arises from that which harms a State, in itself it may (and does) actually do good. Good in other words may come out of evil; which is exactly the principle on which Plato evolves his ideal city out of the
τρυφῶσα πόλις. ὅταν γίγνηται (sc.
κακά) is equivalent (as J. and C. remark) to
ἑκάστοτε: cf.
Phaed. 68 D
φόβῳ μειζόνων κακῶν ὑπομένουσιν αὐτῶν οἱ ἀνδρεῖοι τὸν θάνατον <*>ταν ὑπομένωσιν.
ὅλῳ
. Herwerden's conjecture
μεγάλῳ seems to shew that he connected
σμικρῷ with
στρατοπέδῳ, but the meaning is ‘not by a small amount, but by a whole army.’ For the datives cf. IX 579 C note
πλούτου
δὲ οὐδέν and Liebhold (
Fl. Jahrb. 1888, p. 107)
κόσμου
δὲ ἄλλο μὲν <ἔχοντ)> οὐδέν for
τοῦτον δὲ ἄλλο μὲν οὐδέν. Neither of these proposals has any plausibility, and it is best to regard this as one of the places where we owe the right reading to
Π .